The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, no source, appears to be screenshot Skier Dude (talk) 03:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, no source,book cover would mot likely not be (c) by uploader Skier Dude (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, no source, book cover would most likely not be (c) held by uploader Skier Dude (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, no source, appears to be screenshot Skier Dude (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: kept as valid non-free use. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, no source, school logo would not be (c) held by uploader Skier Dude (talk) 03:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New version, new FUR for licensing and placed in infobox for St. Andrew's College (Australia). -Lastcent (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with {{dfu}} or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be scan of a professional image. Royalbroil 04:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Low resolution, but high-quality action shot. User has uploaded a wide variety of other suspicious sports pictures. I suspect this image has been taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 11:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Low resolution, but high-quality action shot. User has uploaded a wide variety of other suspicious sports pictures. I suspect this image has been taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 11:15, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Low resolution, but high-quality action shot. User has uploaded a wide variety of other suspicious sports pictures. I suspect this image has been taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 11:15, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User has uploaded a variety of other images related to the league, claiming that they are their own work, including logos. I suspect that this image has been taken from elsewhere, rather than self-created. J Milburn (talk) 11:17, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Bjweeks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing on the website about images being in the public domain, and merely editing them does not mean that, suddenly, the copyright belongs to you. J Milburn (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user has a history of uploading copyrighted images under free licenses. GlassCobra 14:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per the copyright notice on the website, it stated permission must be secured and that all the images on the website are copyrighted to begin with. It is also on Wikimedia Commons, uploaded by the same user and using the exact same details. EclipseSSD (talk) 16:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: retagged npd. – Quadell ^(talk) 02:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image appears to originate from [1], thus the gfdl claim is questionable. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 20:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See User_talk:Kara11584#Images_on_City_Museum_Page, OTRS? — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 22:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted content is not de minimis. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 22:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fucks sake. It is easier to just forget an image and simply mention it in the article text. I spoke earlier with Simon Allison who is Marketing Development Manager with NZ Post, (responsible for copyright), who said yeah, fire ahead, no restriction on publication providing there is no commercial component. They even send images of the stamps out with their media releases. I haven't the time or inclination to go through your rigmarole any further. Kaiwhakahaere (talk) 22:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that's not allowable. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.